Abstract
High streamflow variability is a potential risk factor in river management in Korea because the use of water resources in Korea depends primarily on surface water. In this regard, analysis of streamflow variability is critical for efficient water resources management. Because streamflow variability is mainly influenced by the contributions of direct runoff and baseflow, the relationship between baseflow and streamflow is an important hydrological indicator that reflects river characteristics. Accordingly, this study was conducted to estimate the effect of baseflow on streamflow variability. For this purpose, a number of streamflow variability indices (SVIs), such as the Richard–Baker flashiness index, the coefficient of variation, the ratio of high flow to low flow (Q5:Q95), and the coefficient of flow regime, were calculated for Korea’s major river systems to determine which SVI best reflects the characteristics of Korean rivers. In addition, baseflow separation was performed to calculate the relationship between SVIs and the baseflow index. The results of this study show that the baseflow index is inversely proportional to streamflow variability. In particular, the impact of baseflow on streamflow variability was highest in the Yeongsan–Sumjin River system. These results are valuable information expected to be used in river management to better secure water resources.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arnold JG, Allen PM (1999) Automated methods for estimating baseflow and ground water recharge from streamflow records1. J Am Water Resour Assoc 35:411–424
Bae D, Jung I, Chang H (2008) Long-term trend of precipitation and runoff in Korean river basins. Hydrol Process 22:2644–2656
Baker DB, Richards RP, Loftus TT, Kramer JW (2004) A new flashiness index: characteristics and applications to midwestern rivers and streams1. J Am Water Resour Assoc 40:503–522
Berhanu B, Seleshi Y, Demisse SS, Melesse AM (2015) Flow regime classification and hydrological characterization: a case study of Ethiopian rivers. Water 7:3149–3165
Britain G (2005) Science project: groundwater: surface water interactions in the hyporheic zone. Environment Agency, Bristol
Brodie RS, Hostetler S (2005) A review of techniques for analysing baseflow from stream hydrographs. In: Proceedings of the NZHS-IAH-NZSSS 2005 conference
Constantinescu G, Garcia M, Hanes D (2016) River Flow 2016. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Deelstra J, Iital A (2008) The use of the flashiness index as a possible indicator for nutrient loss prediction in agricultural catchments. Boreal Environ Res 13:209–221
Déry SJ, Mlynowski TJ, Hernández-Henríquez MA, Straneo F (2011) Interannual variability and interdecadal trends in Hudson Bay streamflow. J Mar Syst 88:341–351
Déry SJ, Hernández-Henríquez MA, Owens PN et al (2012) A century of hydrological variability and trends in the Fraser River Basin. Environ Res Lett 7:24019
Dettinger MD, Diaz HF (2000) Global characteristics of stream flow seasonality and variability. J Hydrometeorol 1:289–310
Dodov B, Foufoula-Georgiou E (2005) Fluvial processes and streamflow variability: Interplay in the scale-frequency continuum and implications for scaling. Water Resour Res 41:W05005
Durrant J, Byleveld S (2009) Streamflow trends in south-west Western Australia, surface water hydrology series–Report no. HY32, Department of Water, Government of Western Australia
Eckhardt K (2005) How to construct recursive digital filters for baseflow separation. Hydrol Process 19:507–515
Eckhardt K (2008) A comparison of baseflow indices, which were calculated with seven different baseflow separation methods. J Hydrol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.01.005
Fongers D, Manning K, Rathbun J (2007) Application of the Richards-Baker Flashiness Index to gaged Michigan rivers and streams. DEQ Michigan’s Nonpoint Source Program
Gustard A, Bullock A, Dixon JM (1992) Low flow estimation in the United Kingdom. Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford
Haddeland I, Heinke J, Biemans H et al (2014) Global water resources affected by human interventions and climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:3251–3256
Henning A, Pettyjohn T (1979) Hysep-hydrograph separation program. US Geological Survey, Reston
Jordan P, Menary W, Daly K et al (2005) Patterns and processes of phosphorus transfer from Irish grassland soils to rivers—integration of laboratory and catchment studies. J Hydrol 304:20–34
Kang S-K, Lee D-R, Moon J-W, Choi S-J (2010) Effects of dams and water use on flow regime alteration of the Geum River Basin. J Korea Water Resour Assoc 43:325–336
Konrad CP, Booth DB (2002) Hydrologic trends associated with urban development for selected streams in the Puget Sound Basin, Western Washington. US Geological Survey, Reston
Kumambala PG, Ervine A (2009) Site selection for combine hydro, irrigation and water supply in Malawi: assessment of water resource availability. Desalination 248:537–545
Lee JW, Kim HS, Woo HS (1993) An analysis of the effect of damming on flow duration characteristics of five major rivers in Korea. Korean Soc Civ Eng 13:79–91
Lee HS, Park KS, Jung SH, Choi SK (2013) Catchment similarity assessment based on catchment characteristics of GIS in Geum River Catchments, Korea. J Korean Soc Geospatial Inf Syst 21:37–46
Leite V, de Figueiredo T, Pinheiro T et al (2012) Dealing with the very small: first steps of a picohydro demonstration project in an university campus. Renew Energy Power Qual J 1:683–685
Lim KJ, Engel BA, Tang Z et al (2005) Automated web gis based hydrograph analysis tool, WHAT1. J Am Water Resour Assoc 41:1407–1416
Lim KJ, Park YS, Kim J et al (2010) Development of genetic algorithm-based optimization module in WHAT system for hydrograph analysis and model application. Comput Geosci 36:936–944
Luo Y, Jia J, Shao M, Lin L (2012) Study on flood control planning and design for comprehensive improvement project of main-stream of Longganghe river. Water Resour Hydropower Eng 8:15
Lyne V, Hollick M (1979) Stochastic time-variable rainfall-runoff modelling. In: Institute of engineers Australia national conference. pp 89–93
Masih I, Uhlenbrook S, Turral H, Karimi P (2009) Analysing streamflow variability and water allocation for sustainable management of water resources in the semi-arid Karkheh river basin, Iran. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 34:329–340
Mason-Deese W, Dowd JF, Cary RH (2013) Comparison of digital filter hydrograph separation with geochemical separation. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Georgia Water Resources Conference
Miao C-Y, Ni J-R (2009) Variation of natural streamflow since 1470 in the Middle Yellow River, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 6:2849–2864
Minea I (2016) Assessment of the relationship between stream flow and base flow: patterns, analysis, applications. Aerul si Apa Compon ale Mediu, p 76–83
Nam W-H, Hayes MJ, Svoboda MD et al (2015) Drought hazard assessment in the context of climate change for South Korea. Agric Water Manag 160:106–117
Nardo M, Saisana M, Saltelli A, Tarantola S (2005) Tools for composite indicators building. European Commission, EUR 21682 EN. Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen, JRC Ispra, Italy
Nelms DL, Harlow GE, Hayes DC (1997) Base-flow characteristics of streams in the Valley and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont physiographic Provinces of Virginia. US Geological Survey, Reston
O’Brien G, O’Keefe P, Rose J, Wisner B (2006) Climate change and disaster management. Disasters 30:64–80
Phillips CB, Scatena FN (2010) Flashiness indices for urban and rural streams in Puerto Rico. In: AWRA 2010 summer specialty conference, https://www.sas.upenn.edu/lczodata/sites/www.sas.upenn.edu.lczodata/files/ColinPhillips_AWRA%20Flash.pdf. San Juan, Puerto Rico
Poff NL, Ward JV (1989) Implications of streamflow variability and predictability for lotic community structure: a regional analysis of streamflow patterns. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 46:1805–1818
Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB et al (1997) The natural flow regime. Bioscience 47:769–784
Richter BD, Mathews R, Harrison DL, Wigington R (2003) Ecologically sustainable water management: managing river flows for ecological integrity. Ecol Appl 13:206–224
Richards KG, Fenton O, Khalil MI, Haria AH, Humphreys J, Doody D, Moles R, Morgan G, Jordan P (2009) Good water status: The integration of sustainable grassland production and water resources in Ireland. Irish J Agric-Environ Res 7:143–162
Rose S, Peters NE (2001) Effects of urbanization on streamflow in the Atlanta area (Georgia, USA): a comparative hydrological approach. Hydrol Process 15:1441–1457
Rutledge AT (1998) Computer programs for describing the recession of ground-water discharge and for estimating mean ground-water recharge and discharge from streamflow records: Update. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Reston
Rutledge AT, Mesko TO (1996) Estimated hydrologic characteristics of shallow aquifer systems in the Valley and Ridge, the Blue Ridge, and the Piedmont physiographic provinces based on analysis of streamflow recession and base flow. US Geological Survey
Sato K, Masuhara K, Mochida S et al (2012) Flood control in small urban rivers: an example of river projects in Tokyo. Urban Water 122:215
Schwartz SS, Smith B, McGuire M (2012) Baseflow signatures of sustainable water resources. Final Report to the Hughes Center for Agroecology, Queenstown, MD
Sear DA, Armitage PD, Dawson FH (1999) Groundwater dominated rivers. Hydrol Process 13:255–276
Stewart M, Cimino J, Ross M (2007) Calibration of base flow separation methods with streamflow conductivity. Ground Water 45:17–27
Strauch AM, MacKenzie RA, Giardina CP, Bruland GL (2015) Climate driven changes to rainfall and streamflow patterns in a model tropical island hydrological system. J Hydrol 523:160–169
Suriya S, Mudgal BV (2012) Impact of urbanization on flooding: the Thirusoolam sub watershed–a case study. J Hydrol 412:210–219
Taylor RG, Scanlon B, Döll P et al (2013) Ground water and climate change. Nat Clim Change 3:322–329
Toda O, Tanji H, Somura H et al (2004) Evaluation of tributaries contribution in the Mekong River basin during rainy and dry season. In: Proceedings of the second conference of the Asia Pacific association of hydrology and water resources, Singapore. pp 239–248
Zhang Y-K, Schilling KE (2006) Increasing streamflow and baseflow in Mississippi River since the 1940s: effect of land use change. J Hydrol 324:412–422
Zhang Y, Arthington AH, Bunn SE et al (2012) Classification of flow regimes for environmental flow assessment in regulated rivers: the Huai River Basin, China. River Res Appl 28:989–1005
Zheng H, Zhang L, Liu C et al (2007) Changes in stream flow regime in headwater catchments of the Yellow River basin since the 1950s. Hydrol Process 21:886–893
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by “Environmental Basic Research Program, Hanriver watershed management committee”.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Han, J., Kim, J., Lim, K. et al. Impacts of baseflow contribution on the streamflow variability of major river systems in Korea. Paddy Water Environ 16, 835–855 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-018-0673-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-018-0673-8